GM News, New Models and Market Share

Comments

Fitzmall.com had some good deals on the outgoing 2012's not that long ago, but I just checked their site, and they're all sold out. Cheapest they're showing now is a 2013 LS model for $21,432, with an MSRP of $23,290. That price does include freight though, so it seems pretty reasonable if you want one of these.

I don't think the 2012's ever got as cheap as $16K...I think more like $17-18K I think the botched launch of the 2013 ECO-only model might have actually helped dealers clear out the 2012's. People probably saw the price of the ECO, the small trunk, and how fuel economy really wasn't all that, but then it made the 2012 look like a screaming deal.

I think Fitzmall was pushing the V-6 model, with leather and a sunroof, for around $22-23K.

We're going around and around but let's consider that Chevy may have improved and actually earned a good score.

Of course, that's quite possible, and it was never my intention to imply otherwise.

What concerns me the most is how surveys, ratings and numbers get thrown around as if they are always empirically significant, when in fact, they aren't.

When products or services are of like quality and price, ratings can be quite useful and accurate.

My favorite misapplication of numerical data is the hysterically overused "Our organization has over XXX years of combined experience in blah, blah, blah". It's a totally meaningless number by itself.

IBM has how many years of combined experience in computers?

Yet computers have only been in existence for roughly half a century.

Example: You have the choice of flying across the Atlantic on one of two airliners. Jet 1 has 3 pilots, each with 2000 flight hours. Jet 2 has 300 pilots, each with 20 hours of flight time. Both airliners have the same total experience on board.

Which one would you select? Without knowing that additional information, its impossible for one to know there's any difference at all.

Let's consider the Malibu as above-average dependability for a moment. Why have sales tanked?

I just can't understand why the top global auto manufacturer doesn't have a #1 mid-sizer that blows away the competition in their home market! That should happen every year, just like the 3'er for the Bimmer brand in the ELLPS category!!!

That being said, who here likes cars being reviewed after 3 years? That's just the warranty period, I'm much more interested in the 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, and 10th years.

Exactly. I wouldn't even consider a car I couldn't trust to 60K+ miles. I've only ever gotten rid of a car once under 100K, and a couple have gone over 200K. My current one is still pretty sprightly at 130K and counting.

I want to know how a car holds up over the longer term. Somebody else can buy cars every three years, eat the depreciation, and power the economy. Doesn't have to be me. :shades:

Let's consider the Malibu as above-average dependability for a moment. Why have sales tanked?

I just can't understand why the top global auto manufacturer doesn't have a #1 mid-sizer that blows away the competition in their home market!

Saw Motorweek tonight (it apparently was a rerun) and they rapped Malibu on two counts. Poor rear seat legroom - they showed it. Poor gas mileage, only 22.4 mpg. This was a turbo that was tested.

Another car tested, in the ultra luxury ultra expensive segment, was a Bentley GT Turbo V8 with 500 HP and weighing 5000 pounds. It got 20.7 mpg per the testers. The show DID NOT compare the Bentley to the Malibu.

I know this is apples and oranges, but how embarrassing is it to GM that their Malibu got only 1.7 mpg more than the heavier and much more powerful Bentley.

People watching this Motorweek show probably wondered why the Malibu did not return far, far more mpg with a 4 cyl engine than the Bentley with a 500HP turbo V8.

I think a lot more people follow CR than MotorWeek (for right or wrong). Again, the Malibu was rated higher than most all cars in its class, if one looks at total points, in the Feb. CR. They did mention its higher sticker price, but again, I'd ask what can the cars really be bought for?

I still believe it needs more rear legroom. But it's not a t*** like most people here have said without so much as getting within three feet of one.

I notice there's cash on the hood of the "new and desirable" Chevy right now. And not long after people were paying sticker for Hyundais. Not even Hondas, which also go for sticker sometimes. Hyundais were going for sticker, when GM can't get sticker for a Chevy (outside of the 'Vette anyway).

The Equinox was going for sticker when I bought my Malibu, in mid-'11. My wife wanted one, and besides my not liking the looks of it, the refusal to deal on them was another reason I guided my wife to the Malibu.

I guess I thought it was 'reported problems', including mechanical things in their individual charts. Are you saying that mechanical reliability does not factor into the Power numbers? Extremely hard to believe, as you know. BTW, a broken cup holder would be 'interior hardware' on the CR survey.